Ankyrean Anguish - Aetolia-based RAGE

Daskalos

Unfortunately, with the lack of fighters in the game, it's a high risk\high reward scenario. Also, it's a game. If people want to switch sides, it's not as big a deal now that tethering prevents skills from switching sides.

Valenae

What

Daingean

Daskalos said:

Unfortunately, with the lack of fighters in the game, it's a high risk\high reward scenario. Also, it's a game. If people want to switch sides, it's not as big a deal now that tethering prevents skills from switching sides.

Ooor it's just kinda lame. I'm obviously assuming a standard of rp, but I can say without doubt that I've got less respect for people who -just- hop for the pk opportunities or change orgs like underwear.

How're we supposed to really take your character seriously if you'll change sides when it's mechanically appealing, or just because it's Friday, and you've been in guild x for two weeks?

Then again, I've -always- been the sort of person who created alts to explore the 'other side' - I tend towards loyalty by default. At -best-, I'd change sides a single time in a character's life. To each their own, perhaps, but when you become -known- as that guy who can't be relied on... well.. I'm not sure why you'd bother anymore.

Fenrir

It's a game and it's supposed to be fun.

If you don't allow people to switch around occasionally when they want to, they're just going to quit the game. Driving players away is not something that should be encouraged.

However, if you're switching all the time, you're going to get a reputation for it and as Daingean said, nobody is going to rely on you.

Kiyotan

I don't think anyone rages at people switching around occasionally. Rage starts when people switch around frequently. I don't know about BL and Spines, but Duiran and Enorian requires every new councilor/citizen that doesn't join through the newbie intro to take an oath when they join. It may just be a game, but it's a roleplaying game, so there's a degree of investment to it, and I think it's completely fair when breaking oaths has lasting consequences - even for those who are good at combat. Yeah, it'd probably be useful to have another PKer on your team, but if that person is a frequent orghopper and you have to sacrifice your standards for some extra muscle, then the organization loses more than it gains. 

Fenrir

I'm not saying just open the gates ala Mexican border style. Just find ways of punishing them that aren't just "No you can't join us."

Be creative, and you may even find it a fun situation when you get to make their life hard for a little while.

Daskalos

Well, then, Kiyotan, go ahead and kick out Tyrak. We'll take him in Enorian. Or Azton. They've both switched multiple times in the last RL year. Heck, Azton had necromancy last time before he switched. Glass House Dictator.

Hadoryu

Daskalos is right though.

And let's not kid ourselves. Fighters are valuable. And they're valuable IC. Whenever faced with that sort of person before, when I was in a leadership position, I'd weigh the pros and cons to letting them in, then if I knew they were a flake, I'd not put much long-term investment into them, but I'd use them to their strengths. You don't have to take them in, but there are very obvious advantages to letting them in, entirely grounded in RP.

Valenae

I think letting them in when they're an abusive, disrespectful, ignorant, wishy-washy toolbag is annoying and if a gm does that just because 'Lol they can code pretty well' I would begin to loose respect for them and it wouldn't surprise me if factions of the game started to as well.

Daskalos

There comes a point where the risk of internal strife pushes past the reward. The key of a good leader is to create a balance, keep them in line, and see how far you can go. Moirean's risk eventually outweighed her reward, for instance.

Hadoryu

Valenae said:

'Lol they can code pretty well'

That's a pretty terrible viewpoint. 'Lol they can fantasize pretty well' sums up good RPers pretty well too. Good fighters are strong warriors ICly and ignoring their 'coding knowledge' makes for incompetent character decisions. If you're a leader, you damn better weigh their fighting ability into your calculations.

Valenae

So you're defending that players who only pk and, in this context, treat other players like shit - that somehow makes them more valuable over other players and gives them the right to trash other playing experiences? What is a city with good fighters if there is no morale? Correct me if I'm wrong but part of being a good leader is making your guild a place where people WANT to be and the best way to do that is creating an atmosphere that encourages people to participate - not make them ragequit or dread taking part in guild events.

Lin

Valenae said:

So you're defending that players who only pk and, in this context, treat other players like shit - that somehow makes them more valuable over other players and gives them the right to trash other playing experiences? What is a city with good fighters if there is no morale? Correct me if I'm wrong but part of being a good leader is making your guild a place where people WANT to be and the best way to do that is creating an atmosphere that encourages people to participate - not make them ragequit or dread taking part in guild events.

Daskalos said:

There comes a point where the risk of internal strife pushes past the reward. The key of a good leader is to create a balance, keep them in line, and see how far you can go. Moirean's risk eventually outweighed her reward, for instance.

Valenae

@Lin: Obviously that point is valid - I was talking to Had.

Ezalor

Yeah I don't get this vehemence from both sides. RPers seem to look down on fighters, fighters look down on "noncoms." To be completely honest, fighting is valued a lot more because it is so much harder to acquire the proper skills. Coding a system is much harder than writing a few emotes (though people like Xarian might disagree with that, they are the very small minority :P).

Obviously you need more than just PK to be successful but really, it's a root of building everything else up. No one is going to appreciate tough guy RP or respect organizations when all they can do is hide behind guards when it comes time to walk the walk. It doesn't give PKers the right to trash other people's experiences (that's what issues are there for) but fact is they -are- more valuable. As Dask said, there is a fine balance to maintain but PKers are much rarer and thus more valuable than RPers. They provide the mechanical bottom line power that RPers cannot.

It's not fair that they are given so much leeway (orghoppers find their time much easier if they can PK) but such is how life is. It isn't fair that professional athletes can go to prison for something heinous and then come out and be rewarded with a multimillion dollar contract and a secure job but when the demand for your capabilities far outpaces the supply you're going to be afforded special benefits.

Daskalos

One thing I've noticed, is that for the most part PK'ers just avoid RP'ers who don't want to interact with them. It's the RP'ers who generally degrade and blaspheme the PK'ers for being somehow inferior. Is it an inferiority complex because, mechanically, no matter how hard the RP'er acts like a hardass the PK'er will always win? Maybe that's because I've been on the receiving end of it on more than one occasion.

As players, this elitist attitude gets old, but look at most of the cities right now - I'm sorry, but when 1 PK'er - me - can wreak as much havoc as I have in both Spinesreach and Loch, maybe, just maybe, the RP elitists should stop running off their PK'ers.

Rho

Or there was an imbalance between certain skills vs guards and one PK'er took advantage of it to a point that something finally got changed.

Haven

It's pointless to argue who started the inferiority/superiority complex first. It's a trait on both sides of the fence. To be honest? I don't even think it's been a common trend or issue in a long, long time.

Daskalos

Rho said:

Or there was an imbalance between certain skills vs guards and one PK'er took advantage of it to a point that something finally got changed.

I was hardly the first, and I won't be the last. The new guard system seems to be more about equalizing guard density between all the cities than as any attempt to make raids harder.

Hadoryu

I never saw it as a divide, because to be frank, most top end PKers are at the very least functional at RP as well. The people who could ONLY PK were always the marginal extreme. There may be some resentment where some RPers are unhappy about many avenues of character development being closed to them if they can't learn to be better at PK. I mean, everybody wants to be badass, but in Aetolia, being badass in that sense requires a different sort of capability that few enough possess.

Valenae said:

So you're defending that players who only pk and, in this context, treat other players like shit - that somehow makes them more valuable over other players and gives them the right to trash other playing experiences? What is a city with good fighters if there is no morale? Correct me if I'm wrong but part of being a good leader is making your guild a place where people WANT to be and the best way to do that is creating an atmosphere that encourages people to participate - not make them ragequit or dread taking part in guild events.

I think these 'players who only PK' are unicorns, and I didn't just get censored. I don't think the majority of 'predominantly PK oriented' just go out of their way to abuse their IC comrades either. If I have a guild full of loud, but useless primadonnas though, for instance, I wouldn't give much of a damn if they were unhappy about me bringing in someone PK focused. As a leader, you have to balance out things in your org. Obviously, if I was in danger of losing productive, helpful members over the induction of some half-decent fighter, I probably wouldn't go through with it. But saying that people who are primarily interested in PK, and are GOOD at it, aren't an asset to organizations is ignorant.

Ezalor

Eh, the raiding thing is less about PK skills really and more about just willingness to go do something. I'm a noncom and I can make a big difference in defense just by running around with eye sigils and moving guards (actually this is the most effective way. If I attack you you can just lightform while I'm offbal). Of course, there is the point that the willingness to do something like this is closely tied with someone's PK ability but city defense is fairly removed from it as far as direct connections go.

But yes, otherwise it is very much true that PKers are the core foundations for an organization's power. RPing and all that stuff is more like the refinement; it doesn't mean anything if you don't have the foundations. You do want both, of course, and ideally the people who do tap into both effectively are the ones rising to power.

Daskalos

Ezalor was probably the biggest pain in my butt while raiding. Just sayin'

Periluna

In some ways, I have to agree with Dask and Hado. PKers have their value in an organisation and when considering letting them in, if you don't look at that then you aren't doing your role as a guild/city leader justice. 

On the other hand, if I know that someone will be more of a risk than they are worth (Like Dask mentioned with Moirean) from an RP standpoint, then I would not even consider them joining. As a noncom, I make it my goal to know as much about combat as I can - even if I don't use it. Being a PKer should never be an automatic pass into a guild/city, just like being an RPer shouldn't be an automatic pass to say, "I'm a noncom, I don't need to know this."

Alistaire

I, personally, find it really kind of upsetting that people draw a line between "PKers" and "RPers". I was a big combatant on Imperian for years, but still roleplayed. Daskalos roleplays. Mazzion roleplays- quietly and not as often as he codes/fights, but he does it. Just because someone is big into PVP does not mean they can't or don't roleplay and people insisting there is a divide hurts the game.

In that same vein, if you're going to give people who are really good at PK more leeway about switching orgs, you should also take the time to ensure that A- They're not abusing it/other players and B- They're at least a part of your org. Daskalos is one scary sum'bitch, but I'm not going to let him join say...the Templar if he refuses to/is incapable of acting the part of a knight. (Dask is just an example, in this case. I'd inguild him in a heartbeat.)

Phoenecia

As lots of other people have said already, being a PKer is valuable, but it's not - and should not - be an automatic free pass; other things get taken into account when choosing whether or not to let someone into an org. Are they a notorious org-hopper? Can they PK? Can they RP? Are they willing to help out in the org? Are they constantly an annoying, belligerent jerk towards their own allies? Do they kill their own allies a lot on a whim? Do they frequently cause more problems than they solve? Is the org leadership willing to deal with the headaches said person causes? Does said person seem receptive or willing to change their ways? These are all things that get considered, and this isn't just in regards to PKers - this applies to RPers just as much as well.

It doesn't matter if you can RP or PK or dabble and do well in both, the bottom line is if people find you insufferable, feel you're more of a problem than an asset, or don't trust you because you change orgs as often as some people change clothes, an org can turn you down. Just because you're good at PKing/RPing isn't enough of a reason for an org to automatically let you in since they're just part of the larger picture, but being really good at either still holds considerable weight.

Valenae

@Ez: No, see, that's my point: it shouldn't be about who is more valuable. It should be about maintaing a stasis in your organization. I agree with Had on that point though his methodology frustrates the hell out of me. 

Hadoryu said:

I never saw it as a divide, because to be frank, most top end PKers are at the very least functional at RP as well. The people who could ONLY PK were always the marginal extreme. There may be some resentment where some RPers are unhappy about many avenues of character development being closed to them if they can't learn to be better at PK. I mean, everybody wants to be badass, but in Aetolia, being badass in that sense requires a different sort of capability that few enough possess.

Valenae said:

So you're defending that players who only pk and, in this context, treat other players like shit - that somehow makes them more valuable over other players and gives them the right to trash other playing experiences? What is a city with good fighters if there is no morale? Correct me if I'm wrong but part of being a good leader is making your guild a place where people WANT to be and the best way to do that is creating an atmosphere that encourages people to participate - not make them ragequit or dread taking part in guild events.

I think these 'players who only PK' are unicorns, and I didn't just get censored. I don't think the majority of 'predominantly PK oriented' just go out of their way to abuse their IC comrades either. If I have a guild full of loud, but useless primadonnas though, for instance, I wouldn't give much of a damn if they were unhappy about me bringing in someone PK focused. As a leader, you have to balance out things in your org. Obviously, if I was in danger of losing productive, helpful members over the induction of some half-decent fighter, I probably wouldn't go through with it. But saying that people who are primarily interested in PK, and are GOOD at it, aren't an asset to organizations is ignorant.

Are you reading different replies? Because I don't remember saying that PKers weren't an asset, I said that  they shouldn't be valued ABOVE other players. The comment that seemed to get your panties in bunch was: 'Lol they can code pretty well'  which was is in regards to how SIMPLISTIC people are about the talents we exhibit in the game. You read way too much into that comment though I can see why that would give you that impression. We all have our talents and additions to our orgs. Even if that wasn't true I still don't like the idea that because you can kill other players in the game that somehow means you can get away with any/everything - even treating other members of your organization like crap. I'm sorry but saying that people aren't entitled to respect because they don't immerse themselves in the same way you do is ignorant.

Daskalos

So, just an imaginary example.

RP1 has an opinion on everything in the city, and makes his or her voice known fairly often, but other than offering opinions, contributes very little to the city, even in non-combat roles.

PK1 has an opinion on everything in the city, and makes his or her voice known fairly often, but also is consistently fighting in raid defense and at leylines.

Which has more value? PK'ers are -doing something other than talking- and that, alone, makes them more valuable. Sorry,Valenae, but Illidan is always going to be more valuable in my opinion to an organization, because while you RP and talk, he gets out there and does stuff. Phoenecia is a great example of a non-fighter that does a lot of the city and would hurt to lose her, but she's contributing to the city, at the least.

I don't differentiate between PK'ers and RP'ers in the sense of one is superior to the other, but, I do differentiate between THOSE WHO DO and THOSE WHO DO NOT. And, whether anyone wants to admit it or not, the PK'ers are almost always in the THOSE WHO DO category simply because they fight for the city and its goals.

What most of the 'pure RP'ers' forget is that to have the quality of life you want in your environment, you need those PK'ers to help keep you safe.

In the end, it's like I said in another post previously, you can act like a badass all you want, but unless you're capable of backing it up, then you're nothing more than a poser. And, this game has a lot of posers.

 

Hadoryu

Valenae said:

Are you reading different replies? Because I don't remember saying that PKers weren't an asset, I said that  they shouldn't be valued ABOVE other players. The comment that seemed to get your panties in bunch was: 'Lol they can code pretty well'  which was is in regards to how SIMPLISTIC people are about the talents we exhibit in the game. You read way too much into that comment though I can see why that would give you that impression. We all have our talents and additions to our orgs. Even if that wasn't true I still don't like the idea that because you can kill other players in the game that somehow means you can get away with any/everything - even treating other members of your organization like crap. I'm sorry but saying that people aren't entitled to respect because they don't immerse themselves in the same way you do is ignorant.

I'm not reading different replies. And nobody said anything and everything should be forgiven to PKers. Daskalos gave an apt example in Moirean, someone who was incredibly capable and incredibly beneficial to have on your side, but someone whose cons eventually managed to outweigh her pros.

And as Daskalos said in his post just now, PKers are often in the category of people who are a consistent, powerful asset. I'm sorry, but the people with wondrous and intricate family RP who don't contribute to fighting for the org and who don't contribute to managing the org ARE a significantly smaller asset than a pants-on-head brute PKer. It is absolutely not true that everybody contributes in their own way - a whole lot of nice people in the org essentially bring close to nothing to it. Especially so if they just entertain private plotlines to the exclusion of simple guild interaction.

PKers offer a very scarce, very important resource to an organization - they are the people you lean on to solve disputes with other orgs, they are your 'standing' when it comes to settling conflicts between orgs. So yes, while they won't get forgiven everything, they will get forgiven a LOT of things, because they have something important that the org needs. If I have to weigh the pros and cons of someone joining my org, being a capable fighter is a very significant contribution on the 'pro' side of the scale.

Dhar

I think everyone involved has made their opinion on the topic known. Let's move on.

Valenae

Daskalos said:

So, just an imaginary example.

RP1 has an opinion on everything in the city, and makes his or her voice known fairly often, but other than offering opinions, contributes very little to the city, even in non-combat roles.

PK1 has an opinion on everything in the city, and makes his or her voice known fairly often, but also is consistently fighting in raid defense and at leylines.

Which has more value? PK'ers are -doing something other than talking- and that, alone, makes them more valuable. Sorry,Valenae, but Illidan is always going to be more valuable in my opinion to an organization, because while you RP and talk, he gets out there and does stuff. Phoenecia is a great example of a non-fighter that does a lot of the city and would hurt to lose her, but she's contributing to the city, at the least.

I don't differentiate between PK'ers and RP'ers in the sense of one is superior to the other, but, I do differentiate between THOSE WHO DO and THOSE WHO DO NOT. And, whether anyone wants to admit it or not, the PK'ers are almost always in the THOSE WHO DO category simply because they fight for the city and its goals.

What most of the 'pure RP'ers' forget is that to have the quality of life you want in your environment, you need those PK'ers to help keep you safe.

In the end, it's like I said in another post previously, you can act like a badass all you want, but unless you're capable of backing it up, then you're nothing more than a poser. And, this game has a lot of posers.

 

I'm getting a little annoyed watching you spew circular logic at this point. This is my last reply and then you can amuse yourself as much as you'd like with trying to grasp what I'm telling you. We're arguing two different things and those things are: 

My argument: No one should be valued above others because we all have the potential to achieve great things in the game. PKers shouldn't be given free reign in the game. IT SHOULDN'T HAPPEN. Since you brought Illidan up: Illidan shouldn't be allowed to go around inflicting people for the lawlz and to rip people's throats out when a citymate has an opinion that is different from his. I saw five people, all people that DID STUFF IN THE CITY, rage quit because the Heralds kept petting him. I'm not sure if you were involved at that point - you probably weren't. Tbh, I can't even remember since it was at least a rl year ago. 

Your main argument: PKers are valid and should be appreciated for their skills. Not only that, but they're a rare resource. 

Got it. Point taken but the clash isn't even direct. 

@Had - See my above comments. I'm not retyping them all again. Short version: All people do have something to contribute but as a leader part of your responsibility is to set the stage and allow that to happen. Giving PKers full reign negates that and makes it hard on up-and-comers to throw themselves into an organization. 

ALSO: I've seen non-coms be completely badass without fighting. There are different types of conflict other than straight pk. Thought I'd point that out. 

EDIT: I just saw Dhar's reply. I think he ninja'd on in as I was writing my post. Darn gods and their ninja-like ways.